`The System Doesn't Work Anymore'

March 15, 1992

Both political parties are corrupt. ... A bunch of losers are running for president. ... I don't believe in anything they say. ... The system doesn't work anymore . . .

Few Americans seem satisfied with the caliber of candidates who wish to lead the nation. Exit polls show a high degree of cynicism among voters. They are dismayed with President Bush. They are unhappy with the alternatives and wonder why no better challenger came forward than Bill Clinton, Paul E. Tsongas, Jerry Brown, Bob Kerrey, Tom Harkin, Patrick J. Buchanan and David Duke.

Although the depth of dissatisfaction should not be underestimated, some perspective is in order. Americans have had regular rendezvous with far-from-perfect candidates.

When was the last time a candidate excited, inspired and energized the nation? Not four years ago, when Mr. Bush ran against Michael S. Dukakis, or in 1984 when President Ronald Reagan faced Walter F. Mondale.

In 1980, voters could choose from among Mr. Reagan, President Jimmy Carter and independent John B. Anderson. Mr. Reagan's victory was resounding, but most people were not thrilled by his candidacy; they chose him because they could not stomach four more years of Mr. Carter.

Voters were also unenthusiastic in the 1976 contest between Mr. Carter and President Gerald R. Ford. And in 1972, there was no euphoria when President Richard M. Nixon and George S. McGovern locked horns.

Remember the contest between Mr. Nixon and Hubert H. Humphrey in 1968 and between President Lyndon B. Johnson and Barry M. Goldwater four years earlier? Were the victors in those years highly popular? Did the masses have great faith in them? Not really. In both elections, the driving force was fear. Americans were scared by Mr. Goldwater's rhetoric on Social Security and nuclear war, and by Mr. Humphrey's blind support of the Vietnam War.

One might recall 1960 as being an exception; after all, the charismatic John F. Kennedy ran against the dour Mr. Nixon. But remember again. Voters were not thrilled with either candidate. Mr. Kennedy's victory margin was hair-thin; he won by 118,550 votes out of 68.3 million cast. Distaste for Mr. Nixon was matched by alarm over Mr. Kennedy's "ties to Rome" and association with "Adlai

Stevenson liberals."

Elections rarely offer a choice of ideal candidates. Those who would make the best presidents are not necessarily those who run for the office.

Voters, however, want the best there is, not only the best of available choices. The perennial yearning for someone "better" out there is genuine.

In dire economic and social conditions, people tend to double their search for a hero. America is in a prolonged recession, and discontent may be deeper this year than in many previous presidential election years.

People unhappy with "the system" should ask themselves why "better" candidates do not run for office. Is it because the electorate tolerates runaway campaign spending and focuses on the peccadilloes of office seekers? Is it because people have implicitly supported one of the most tiring and complicated presidential nominating systems in the world?

"They're going to have a revolution in this country one day," said a union leader in Detroit last week. He and others are obviously discouraged by economic conditions and the quality of the candidates. Although the frustration is understandable, there is an antidote for the gloom and doom: Americans who think this is the worst year for presidential choices should look back and remember those who said in previous elections:

"If Goldwater wins, I'm leaving the country." "An actor in B-movies living in the White House? Impossible." "A grim choice between the `I'm not a crook' president and the whining socialist McGovern."

And then there is the man who said, "Democracy is talking itself to death. The people do not know what they want; they do not know what is the best for them. There is too much foolishness, too much lost motion. ... Democracy is beautiful in theory; in practice, it is a fallacy. You in America will see that someday."

Benito Mussolini made that prediction in 1928. Yes, many Americans are unhappy with their presidential choices every four years, but in their hearts and heads they know that they are engaging in neither foolishness nor lost motion